Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] sched: Replace rq::wake_list

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 02:38:29PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> Does the struct actually have to be named?  How about:
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index c5d96e3e7fff42..14ca25cda19150 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -653,8 +653,14 @@ struct task_struct {
>  	unsigned int			ptrace;
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> -	struct llist_node		wake_entry;
> -	unsigned int			wake_entry_type;
> +	/*
> +	 * wake_entry_type must follow wake_entry, even when
> +	 * CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT=y.
> +	 */
> +	struct {
> +		struct llist_node	wake_entry;
> +		unsigned int		wake_entry_type;
> +	};
>  	int				on_cpu;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK
>  	/* Current CPU: */
> 
> 
> However, it would be preferable to not rely on different structs sharing the
> same field order, but rather write proper C code that uses the same struct
> everywhere to encapsulate these 2 fields...

https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200605093704.GB2948@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And I have more patches on top to clean up some of the anonymous union
stuff, that that's quite a lot of frobbing.